Blasphemy Law Is Coming To America
Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:09 pm » by Abdul14
Muslim-in-Chief endorses UN Resolution that will criminalize defamation of religion (Islam), i.e., quoting from the Quran
And so begins Barack Hussein Obama’s Islamo-centric inspired attack on the First Amendment. When we get a real American president, this attack on free speech can be repealed. Otherwise bloggers could be charged with blasphemy for telling the truth about Islam
The U.N. General Assembly on Monday adopted a resolution condemning the stereotyping, negative profiling and stigmatization of people based on their religion, and urging countries to take effective steps “to address and combat such incidents.”
No member state called for a recorded vote on the text, which was as a result adopted “by consensus.”
The resolution, an initiative of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), is based on one passed by the U.N.’s Human Rights Council in Geneva last spring. The State Department last week hosted a meeting to discuss ways of “implementing” it.
Every year since 1999 the OIC has steered through the U.N.’s human rights apparatus a resolution condemning the “defamation of religion,” which for the bloc of 56 Muslim states covered incidents ranging from satirizing Mohammed in a newspaper cartoon to criticism of shari’a and post-9/11 security check profiling.
Critics regard the measure as an attempt to outlaw valid and critical scrutiny of Islamic teachings, as some OIC states do through controversial blasphemy laws at home.
Strongly opposed by mostly Western democracies, the divisive “defamation” resolution received a dwindling number of votes each year, with the margin of success falling from 57 votes in 2007 to 19 in 2009 and just 12 last year.
This year’s text was a departure, in that it dropped the “defamation” language and included a paragraph that reaffirms “the positive role that the exercise of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the full respect for the freedom to seek, receive and impart information can play in strengthening democracy and combating religious intolerance.”
The nod to freedom of expression won the resolution the support of the U.S. and other democracies, with the Obama administration and others hailing it as a breakthrough after years of acrimonious debate.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton took the opportunity of the State Department-hosted talks with foreign governments, the OIC and other international bodies last week to stress the importance of freedom of speech in the U.S. She argued that “the best way to treat offensive speech is by people either ignoring it or combating it with good arguments and good speech that overwhelms it.”
Nonetheless, the resolution adopted in New York on Monday does contain elements that concern some free speech and religious freedom advocates.
It calls on states “to take effective measures to ensure that public functionaries in the conduct of their public duties do not discriminate against an individual on the basis of religion or belief.”Governments also are expected to make “a strong effort to counter religious profiling, which is understood to be the invidious use of religion as a criterion in conducting questionings, searches and other law enforcement investigative procedures.” (So no more profiling of potential muslim terrorists on planes?)
“Effective measures” to counter cases of religious stereotyping and stigmatization include education, interfaith dialogue and “training of government officials.”
And in the worst cases, those of “incitement to imminent violence” based on religion, the resolution calls on countries to implement “measures to criminalize” such behavior. (If a Paki terrorist kills someone in Pakistan and blames it on this blog, then I am responsible?)
Also of note is the fact that the resolution singles out for praise only one interfaith initiative – and that initiative was established by Saudi Arabia, a leading OIC member-state with a long history of enforcing blasphemy laws.
The resolution commends the establishment of the King Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz International Centre for Interreligious and Intercultural Dialogue, “acknowledging the important role that the Centre is expected to play as a platform for the enhancement of interreligious and intercultural dialogue.” (Yes, because Saudi Arabia is a bastion of religious freedom. Who want to take a trip to Mecca with me?)
Another clause welcomes “all international, regional and national initiatives aimed at promoting interreligious, intercultural and interfaith harmony and combating discrimination against individuals on the basis of religion or belief,” but the Saudi one alone is recognized specifically.
Monday’s adoption of the text took place without a debate. Earlier, when a General Assembly committee considered the draft resolution, a delegate of Poland – speaking on behalf of the European Union – raised concern about the fact it mentioned by name only one center for interreligious dialogue, even though there were numerous such facilities around the world.
The E.U. was also concerned that the resolution considered the world as “monolithic religious blocs,” while religious hatred was primarily a threat to individual freedoms, he said. Despite those concerns, the E.U. was prepared to join consensus and support the resolution.
The U.S. representative, John Sammis, said the United States was pleased to join the consensus. It had been unable to support previous resolutions of this type because they sought to restrict expression and were “counterproductive,” he said, but the new one upholds respect for universal human rights. (Whose universal rights – the Saudi government’s?)
And so begins Barack Hussein Obama’s Islamo-centric inspired attack on the First Amendment. When we get a real American president, this attack on free speech can be repealed. Otherwise bloggers could be charged with blasphemy for telling the truth about Islam
The U.N. General Assembly on Monday adopted a resolution condemning the stereotyping, negative profiling and stigmatization of people based on their religion, and urging countries to take effective steps “to address and combat such incidents.”
No member state called for a recorded vote on the text, which was as a result adopted “by consensus.”
The resolution, an initiative of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), is based on one passed by the U.N.’s Human Rights Council in Geneva last spring. The State Department last week hosted a meeting to discuss ways of “implementing” it.
Every year since 1999 the OIC has steered through the U.N.’s human rights apparatus a resolution condemning the “defamation of religion,” which for the bloc of 56 Muslim states covered incidents ranging from satirizing Mohammed in a newspaper cartoon to criticism of shari’a and post-9/11 security check profiling.
Critics regard the measure as an attempt to outlaw valid and critical scrutiny of Islamic teachings, as some OIC states do through controversial blasphemy laws at home.
Strongly opposed by mostly Western democracies, the divisive “defamation” resolution received a dwindling number of votes each year, with the margin of success falling from 57 votes in 2007 to 19 in 2009 and just 12 last year.
This year’s text was a departure, in that it dropped the “defamation” language and included a paragraph that reaffirms “the positive role that the exercise of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the full respect for the freedom to seek, receive and impart information can play in strengthening democracy and combating religious intolerance.”
The nod to freedom of expression won the resolution the support of the U.S. and other democracies, with the Obama administration and others hailing it as a breakthrough after years of acrimonious debate.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton took the opportunity of the State Department-hosted talks with foreign governments, the OIC and other international bodies last week to stress the importance of freedom of speech in the U.S. She argued that “the best way to treat offensive speech is by people either ignoring it or combating it with good arguments and good speech that overwhelms it.”
Nonetheless, the resolution adopted in New York on Monday does contain elements that concern some free speech and religious freedom advocates.
It calls on states “to take effective measures to ensure that public functionaries in the conduct of their public duties do not discriminate against an individual on the basis of religion or belief.”Governments also are expected to make “a strong effort to counter religious profiling, which is understood to be the invidious use of religion as a criterion in conducting questionings, searches and other law enforcement investigative procedures.” (So no more profiling of potential muslim terrorists on planes?)
“Effective measures” to counter cases of religious stereotyping and stigmatization include education, interfaith dialogue and “training of government officials.”
And in the worst cases, those of “incitement to imminent violence” based on religion, the resolution calls on countries to implement “measures to criminalize” such behavior. (If a Paki terrorist kills someone in Pakistan and blames it on this blog, then I am responsible?)
Also of note is the fact that the resolution singles out for praise only one interfaith initiative – and that initiative was established by Saudi Arabia, a leading OIC member-state with a long history of enforcing blasphemy laws.
The resolution commends the establishment of the King Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz International Centre for Interreligious and Intercultural Dialogue, “acknowledging the important role that the Centre is expected to play as a platform for the enhancement of interreligious and intercultural dialogue.” (Yes, because Saudi Arabia is a bastion of religious freedom. Who want to take a trip to Mecca with me?)
Another clause welcomes “all international, regional and national initiatives aimed at promoting interreligious, intercultural and interfaith harmony and combating discrimination against individuals on the basis of religion or belief,” but the Saudi one alone is recognized specifically.
Monday’s adoption of the text took place without a debate. Earlier, when a General Assembly committee considered the draft resolution, a delegate of Poland – speaking on behalf of the European Union – raised concern about the fact it mentioned by name only one center for interreligious dialogue, even though there were numerous such facilities around the world.
The E.U. was also concerned that the resolution considered the world as “monolithic religious blocs,” while religious hatred was primarily a threat to individual freedoms, he said. Despite those concerns, the E.U. was prepared to join consensus and support the resolution.
The U.S. representative, John Sammis, said the United States was pleased to join the consensus. It had been unable to support previous resolutions of this type because they sought to restrict expression and were “counterproductive,” he said, but the new one upholds respect for universal human rights. (Whose universal rights – the Saudi government’s?)
When you buy halal products, you are financing inhumaely slaughter and torture of animals
- Moonglum1972
- Posts: 89
- Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 11:14 pm
Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:55 pm » by Moonglum1972
Fuck em. I will blaspheme freely. As I always have. If I am killed for it so be it. I am about sick of this shit hole anyway.
Wed Dec 21, 2011 9:03 pm » by Abdul14
Hussein thinks he’s Fourth Best President Ever !
The clip 60 minutes left on the cutting room floor that probably should have been highlighted was when he declared he was the 4th best president in history. When asked about his administrations work so far, he says they’ve done more than any administration with the ‘possible exception’ of FDR, Johnson & Lincoln. Who needs the next George Washington? He’s sitting in the Oval Office right now!
The Audacity of a Muselputz
The clip 60 minutes left on the cutting room floor that probably should have been highlighted was when he declared he was the 4th best president in history. When asked about his administrations work so far, he says they’ve done more than any administration with the ‘possible exception’ of FDR, Johnson & Lincoln. Who needs the next George Washington? He’s sitting in the Oval Office right now!
The Audacity of a Muselputz
When you buy halal products, you are financing inhumaely slaughter and torture of animals
Sun Dec 25, 2011 11:01 am » by Abdul14
“We don’t have freedom of speech in Islam. We have the freedom to obey Allah.”
Here, again, we are offered yet another example of why Islam is wholly incompatible with Western values.
An ominous marker of any totalitarian regime is a set of laws under which a citizen, more accurately a subject, can be charged criminally at any time and/or on no basis. Such laws are intended to keep subjects wary and on guard at all times such that no mischief against the state can be generated. In other words, “peace.” Stated differently, peace to the leftist means no opposition to the state. And in Islam the state is Islam, and Islam is the state.
In any totalitarian regime the state is first and foremost, with individuals allowed to exist only to perpetuate the state
Here, again, we are offered yet another example of why Islam is wholly incompatible with Western values.
An ominous marker of any totalitarian regime is a set of laws under which a citizen, more accurately a subject, can be charged criminally at any time and/or on no basis. Such laws are intended to keep subjects wary and on guard at all times such that no mischief against the state can be generated. In other words, “peace.” Stated differently, peace to the leftist means no opposition to the state. And in Islam the state is Islam, and Islam is the state.
In any totalitarian regime the state is first and foremost, with individuals allowed to exist only to perpetuate the state
When you buy halal products, you are financing inhumaely slaughter and torture of animals
-
- Related topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- Is America coming apart?
1, 2by spock » Sat Sep 12, 2009 5:33 pm - 15 Replies
- 644 Views
- Last post by hesop
Mon Sep 14, 2009 7:23 am
- Is America coming apart?
-
- What is America coming to?
by Demobe » Mon Sep 24, 2012 12:35 am - 3 Replies
- 193 Views
- Last post by Nihilgeist
Mon Sep 24, 2012 1:09 am
- What is America coming to?
-
- The coming drone attack on America
by Icarus1 » Sun Dec 23, 2012 4:41 pm - 0 Replies
- 151 Views
- Last post by Icarus1
Sun Dec 23, 2012 4:41 pm
- The coming drone attack on America
-
- The Crash - Coming Financial Collapse of America
by herbert » Thu Oct 23, 2008 4:09 pm - 5 Replies
- 229 Views
- Last post by herbert
Thu Oct 23, 2008 5:21 pm
- The Crash - Coming Financial Collapse of America
-
- America 1950 vs. America 2012
by pretzellogic » Tue Feb 28, 2012 9:19 pm - 2 Replies
- 277 Views
- Last post by domdabears
Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:21 am
- America 1950 vs. America 2012